On 16.03.2016 20:53, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> Access to dev->initialized is atomic, therefore we don't have to
> protect it with a mutex.
Mutexes are used to split the code to mutually exclusive execution blocks,
so not arguing about the apparently correct change itself I want to
emphasize that the given explanation of the change in the commit message is
wrong. Atomic access does not cancel a specific care about execution
ordering.
Indirectly it applies to ("rc-core: allow calling rc_open with device not
initialized"), where "initialized" bool property was changed to atomic_t
type --- this (sub-)change is just useless.
Please grasp the topic and reword the commit message.
> Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/media/rc/rc-main.c | 2 --
> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/media/rc/rc-main.c b/drivers/media/rc/rc-main.c
> index 4e9bbe7..68541b1 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/rc/rc-main.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/rc/rc-main.c
> @@ -1492,9 +1492,7 @@ int rc_register_device(struct rc_dev *dev)
> }
>
> /* Allow the RC sysfs nodes to be accessible */
> - mutex_lock(&dev->lock);
> atomic_set(&dev->initialized, 1);
> - mutex_unlock(&dev->lock);
>
> IR_dprintk(1, "Registered rc%u (driver: %s, remote: %s, mode %s)\n",
> dev->minor,
>
--
With best wishes,
Vladimir
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
